The recent actions of the ELCA council revamping ministry policies and welcoming ELM clergy into the ELCA were natural consequences of CWA09–hardly surprising but welcome nevertheless. For those of us in the ELCA, as well as the trio of dissident organizations (LCMC, CORE, & Wordalone), the news and the issues behind the news are in some ways old hat.
Not so with a national news article appearing on the Huffington Post and the hundreds of comments that follow. The article was written by Rev Dr. Cindi Love, the newly appointed executive director of Soulforce (an LGBTQ advocacy group). Except for the rather notably understated reference to CWA09 as merely “discussions”, the article is pretty straight forward. Many of the comments that follow the article are rants from trolls.
Yet, I commend the article and the comments because it affords us a glimpse into the way others view Lutherans. Hear the words of Dr. Love:
The ELCA has served as the beta test site for a process through which a very traditional faith community can reverse its thinking and policies. They will continue to push the envelope and all of us will learn from their experiences. Other denominational leaders and congregants will be glad that they tested the waters first.
The ELCA has conducted itself with grace and dignity, and many of us are longing for some of that type of public civility. Their example is going to make people within other embattled denominations long for a better process within their own communities. The ELCA members didn’t wage war in public with one another. There was no public outcry that diminished everyone while they worked their way through a quarter century of discussion.
One critical comment pointed out that Love overlooks the pain of dissension felt in some congregations and some geographical areas such as Montana:
Unfortunately the ELCA churches of Montana are going through tremendous upheaval over this issue- yes, they are arguing in public, friendships of many years are dissolving as people refuse to talk to one another, or yell at each other, some churches have stopped donating to the ELCA altogether etc. Most every church is taking a vote on whether to leave the ELCA or not. This is the situation in Montana, and it’s not pretty or quiet- and readers need to know that tremendous pain is being caused by this process.
Other comments contain plenty of judgment and condemnation:
ELCA – Another Apostate Denomination … God will be their judge. Woe to them when that time comes.
But, there is a refreshing new awareness from many that the ELCA may be a welcoming place. There is a recurring theme of agnostics and wounded former Christians taking a second look. Here is a sampling:
So Lutherans, I applaud your decision to welcome ALL your children back into your pews. I hope other religious leaders will follow your example.
I’m confused, but for the most part happy. As a proud agnostic, I have issues with people’s struggle to be accepted by a segment of the population that blatantly thought less of them. However, I wholeheartedly embrace the decision by the church as something loving and progressive.
I am not even a Christian, but nonetheless, throughout my life, I have revered the message of Christ – one of love and tolerance and inclusion. And that’s what the Lutherans did with this declaration – they embraced the loving spirit of Christ regardless of the words (and translated, to boot!) in the book … Jesus would be proud of them. They are walking with the spirit in love and acceptance. Exactly the way Jesus intended.
What is so striking to me about the Lutheran journey toward inclusion is the way that, in recent years especially, they have considered their ministry to the LGBTQ community. When asked, what is the pastoral message to the LGBTQ, they have had an answer. All too often, our congregations/denominations reveal that they have no response to the pastoral needs of the LGBTQ community. Kudos to the ELCA! May we all follow their example.
Some straight people equate homosexuality with one thing SEX. Why not try just once to look at us as people. You are so hung up on the sexual aspect you can’t see the forest for the trees. Stop using the bible to do your dirty work and stop hiding behind it. Do some research or are you afraid to learn we put our socks on one foot at a time just like you. I imagine many bibles are only dusted off when needed as an anti gay weapon because you would not be spewing this garbage if you read it.
Congratulations, ECLA, and a bit of applause from one of the ‘neighbors.’ 🙂
You’ve helped make the world a little less divided tonight, …whatever some may say, less hate in the world can’t be bad. Blessed be.
When it comes to Christians, the Lutherans are probably the most tolerant. They believe in grace.
Once I read this, as a former Mormon but (continuing) homosexual man, I have spent the afternoon researching the Lutheran-organized charities in my neighborhood. I am thrilled that there is finally a faith-based organization I can believe in (even though it has specific tenets with which I do not agree.) I am excited that I can volunteer with or donate to their charity organizations without the underlying fear that the fruits of my good intentions will go toward encouraging further discrimination against me, my husband and my fellow gay brothers and sisters.
There was a time when this news would have meant a lot to me personally. I still think it’s great, particularly since the influence of the church is so huge in the U.S. I’m happy that a major mainline denomination has taken this step and hope it will lead others (like the milk toast Methodists) to finally do the same. For me personally, however, this is too little to late. I gave up on the church long ago partly because of it’s stance on homosexuality, among a host of other nonsensical stances. I now consider myself an agnostic more inclined to support secular humanism that some religious superstition and hierarchy. Still – congratulations to those still within the church who have worked so hard for this victory against prejudice and ignorance.
Even as a non-believer, I find this to be great news. Thank you, Lutherans. Maybe some believers actually are good people.
Well, here is a newsflash, it is not only Montana in upheaval, but at least half the ELCA synods are dealing with scores of congregations voting to leave or leaving in spirit, and at least 10 of them the giving is down 30% or more.
I am getting tired of people in Chicago, NY, LA, and other metro areas making this out as some hicks in remote areas being the only ones where there is fallout. There is fallout in Southern California, where at least 11 churches are are leaving in San Diego/environs; fallout in Phoenix and Tucson, AZ, fallout in metro Atlanta metro Dallas FW. That’s for starters.
I don’t want to debate the usual, I am just pointing out that Montana is not the lone voice here.
@Jeff
Well, Jeff, it depends on how biased one is and why. There will be fall out from the Aug. decision for a while until people find out that it isn’t going to affect them that much personally.
@ Lilly
Sorry, Lilly, but that is a devastatingly self-centered view. If this is the right thing, then I want it for everyone. If it is the wrong thing, then I want if for no one. This is not a Simon & Garfunkel song; we are the Body of Christ and even those outside it are those for whom Christ died.
The fact that we cannot agree on the nature of the thing (or any of a lot of things) means that we have different denominations, but I still pray for what is right for every one else.
And like Lincoln, I do not pray that God is on my side, but that I am on God;s.
blessings
TS
@Jeff
Without meaning to minimize the pain that many denominations are feeling, it also important not to overstate the case.
Latest figures from the ELCA suggest that around 220 congregations have passed a first vote to leave–which means that over 10,000 congregations have not. Nearly a third of ELCA synods have not had a single congregation vote to leave. In the midst of the greatest economic downturn since the depression, there are other reasons besides CWA09 resolutions for decreased benevolence to synods. While it certainly is not solely a rural phenomenon (several notable urban mega churches are leaving), there is a fairly strong correlation to mostly rural synods.
But, ultimately, the greatest single factor is the pastoral leadership. Very few of the congregations that have voted to leave have done so contrary to their pastor’s wishes. And, of those congregations that do choose to leave, it is usually because the pastor has been a cheerleader for the process.
Yes, there are exceptions to these generalities, but it is often the exception that proves the rule.
My Reconciling in Christ church has experienced less giving in the past year or so, and zero people have left over the CWA decisions – in fact, the decisions have energized our congregation and brought in new people. In case no one has noticed recently, the percent of unemployed is still in the double digits in my city and many others – and the number of people who are underemployed, taking jobs that pay less, etc, is larger beyond that. Our benevolence is down because our members can’t contribute as much as they once did.
I find it curious how eager Jeff and others are to overstate the situation that the ELCA faces. It’s almost like they want the denomination to suffer as much as possible because of the sexuality decisions…
Obie,
While I would agree one cannot overstate the case, many folks need to understand that the process of voting and financial fallout is just beginning this year for many, but even if only 10% of the congregations vote to leave, that is not where the true fallout will be felt .
The true fallout is in congregations of 100 or less having 10 or 20 or 30 % of their members leave and then having to close. How many have just walked? How many have gone to other churches? In my area, congregations are reporting lots of people just walking-sometimes up to 20 or thirty families in a church. THat won’t be reported for a year or more as annual reports are always a year behind. How many are in conflict? How many will stay, but not give anything to ELCA?
I am not suggesting ELCA will collapse. I am suggesting that the impact is far more than a few rural areas. And I disagree completely it is mostly rural. The four largest ELCA churches in Arizona are either leaving or split, all in metro areas. The fifth, which is the congregation I serve, is set to take a first vote Sunday. In our synod alone there are 5 of the largest top 20 ELCA churches in term of worship attendance (not baptized membership) , and all are leaving or split asunder by the vote.
However, it is not the larger churches that will feel the impact most, it is the thousands of small and medium size ones.
Ann, I find your comment rude and offensive. As I have noted previously, I come from a long line of being in Lutheran synods back to the ULCA as a little tyke, with five pastors in my family. If you don’t think this process has been anything but reluctant and painful for me or for many others, then I wonder how inclusive and loving that really is to those who disagree with your viewpoints.
Maybe some take “joy” in this, but I don’t. I dislike what is happening now, on all sides. And I did sit with many of my brothers and sisters at CWA who were FOR the changes, but voted AGAINST them because they loved the ELCA so much they did not want schism.
At CWA, we were told as voting members that the ELCA was doing “pretty well despite the economy in 2009”. Now, seven months later, all we hear from leadership is how the economy is impacting the ELCA, and little about CWA. It is not either/or, it is both /and.
If your congregation grows and is energized by the CWA decisions, then money shouldn’t be an issue. We have grown by 150 members since then, none of them but one couple “fallout” from other churches, and our giving is strong.
I will not be convinced the CWA decisions will help the ELCA grow until I see it reflected in real statistics. In fact, I think it will hasten the end of the ELCA, but reality tell us even without these issues denominations are a thing of the past anyway.
I just want to jump in and clarify the “220 first vote congregations.” I just came from my Synod Council and what was reported was that 220 congregations did not mean 220 individual congregations. Some of the 220 are congregations that failed the first vote and decided to vote again.
We can argue scripture until we are blue in the face and each have a different interpretation. We’ll never agree on viewpoints here.
But math doesn’t lie.
For argument’s sake, let’s say 220 is each an individual congregation that has taken the first vote. And let’s round down the total number of total ELCA congregations to 10,000 congregations.
In other words, this implosion (alas,my own congregation has statistically been a part of this)impacted 2.2% of the ELCA
Tony cited in a few posts back that the first vote was defeated in about 60 of those first votes did not pass constitutional muster. 220-60 is 160.
Again, for argument’s sake,let’s just say all of those 160 congregations seceded.
That would be roughly 1.5% of all ELCA congregations will or have departed to date
Not exactly an enormous groundswell.
Now there are plenty of anti-ELCA websites that squee with delight each time a congregation secedes from the ELCA (seriously, do people like Skogen and Captain Thin also revel in stomping puppies? Because they are reveling in a lot of other people’s pain.) Anyhow, these sites take great pride in each congregation splintering from the ELCA.
And in something completely unrelated, but I figure there are enough here to answer this…
I used to be LCMS as many of you know. How common is it for a Missouri Synod pastor to go by the title “Father”? The reason I ask is over at my blog a self-proclaimed orthodox LCMS pastor who goes by Fr. is, surprise surprise, telling me I’m doing it wrong. I don’t recall any of my past Missouri Synod pastors going by that title, nor do I recall any Missouri Synod pastors at Valpo using that style of title.
What gives, because did Ijust forget elements of my childhood, or is there some subset of Missouri Synod Lutheranism that styles itself more Catholic than others?
????
whoops, sorry about all of the bold. I screwed up my html coding and wordpress doesn’t have an edit option for simple replies.
A modest proposal to ELCA Research and Evaluation staff:
How about convincing the presiding bishop to allow website posting of:
1 — accurate, up to date information about congregations that are taking action to leave. A simple spreadsheet with names of congregations, by synod, that have taken first and second votes, dates and results of votes, and, if the congregation has voted to leave, whether pastor(s) resigned from the congregation or went with it and resigned from the ELCA. Also note year congregation was established and (if pre-1988) whether it was ALC, LCA or AELC. What the heck, even note where they’ve gone (another Lutheran body, unaffiliated Lutheran, another denomination, independent, of ????) If synod council action is required to approve a particular congregation’s leaving, note status of that, too. Some synods have had the courage to publish some of this information, whether or not the vote to leave passed or failed.
2. — Monthly summaries churchwide income and expense data, by synod and by type of income (mission share remitted by synods, etc., along with variances to budget and to previous year.) Someone in ELCA administration keeps track of this for internal use, so why not just share it regularly with the whole body?
A few synods have posted summaries as suggested in item 1. Others say that only a handful of people and congregations are concerned about these matters. If that be the case, then what is there to fear in a little transparency? And, it wouldn’t be all that much work if there are so few congregations taking votes.
Besides, we’re pretty confident that such information is being tracked by churchwide anyway. (If it isn’t, then we’d have to wonder why not?)
The ELCA churchwide office would be doing a great service to the whole church, and saving the synods the trouble of duplicating reporting efforts, by making this information readily available rather than dribbling it out.
Then again, what would we have to talk about it we weren’t spending so much time speculating? God’s mission and our ministry, maybe? Now there’s a thought!
@Kelly,
Yes, to answer your question. There is a subset of LCMS & ELCA & soon NALC folks who style themselves +STS. They go by the moniker Society of the Holy Trinity. STS is very strong in the northeast.
I had a buddy from Sem from Portland,OR. Took a first call in and ELCA synod in the NE. He received notice of the synod leadership conference and it said that cassocks would be worn at all times!
Some of these folks to go with the whole home to Rome thing and call themselves Father. It is not limited to LCMS. It is one of the fault lines that, frankly, kept the LCA from ever being really unified and now still shows in the ELCA.
Different understandings of ministry and Scripture are one of the reasons why I have sometimes described the ELCA as too big to succeed. Actually, the CWA decisions of last August may have finally given those remaining after the fight something to rally around.
Blessings, TS
@Tony: thanks for the clarification. I thought I was having a stroke, because I never recall addressing my former pastors as Father.
@Jeff
I can match your Lutheran pedigree, though my siblings and I were the first generation on either side of my family to attend college, so I have no pastors in my family. That’s not really the point, though. And you can dismiss me as “rude” and “offensive” if you’d like – men often call women who speak and write bluntly much worse.
I have to take you at your word when you say that you find no joy in proclaiming the “hastening of the end” of the ELCA – but I’d like to suggest, in as loving and inclusive a way as I possibly can, that it is not helpful to the denomination that you care about so deeply to exaggerate the situation it faces. In your first comment, you said that synods are seeing “scores” of congregations leaving. To the very best of my knowledge, that isn’t true at this point, and only has the possibility of ever being the case in a small handful of synods.
And since my motivation for posting my first comment has been called into question, I’d like to suggest that the point of “bound conscience” is not that opponents of the CWA decisions get to say whatever they want without others challenging them. Disagreement does not equal lack of love or lack of inclusion – in fact, I have family members and lifelong friends (not just strangers on the internet!) who disagree with me on this issue, and some of them are members of churches that are experiencing a great deal of turmoil over this issue. I also have personal experience with at least one of the synods that might actually see “scores” of congregations departing. I didn’t just fall off the turnip truck, here – I have some idea what I’m talking about.
Ann, I have no problem with disagree, and challenging each other. That is not the point. The point was that you seemed to indicate I enjoyed this, and I don’t.
My synod is seeing a lot of congregations leaving. So is one in southern California. So are several others in the midwest , and Texas, and Florida.
The point is , I would hope even one church leaving in one synod would be cause for reflection. Saying “well, only so many are leaving” ….isn’t really helpful.
As for Kelly’s point above, I stick to my original comment on this thread, looking only at the number of congregations who have voted to date is not the only indicator. Follow the money trail, and know that the fallout of members leaving to date in parishes is not reported until next year for this year…..so, tell me, what is realistic, noting 2% has actually voted to leave to date, or figuring out if only ONE member in each church left (noting that won’t happen statstically), that is 10,000 people?
In my synod alone I count 10 congregations have left, with about 11,000 baptized members. This doesn’t include counting those who have walked, or one church with 1200 members who has lost half their members and is hanging on for dear life.
I would say that would be scores, wouldn’t you?
@Jeff:
For everyone one of those congregations that you boast have fled the ELCA, you do realize that it is never a 100% defection. For most congregations, the decisions us not unanimous. That means not everyone of those 11,000 have left the ELCA. There are many that will remain–myself included–if their congregations leave.
seriously, why is the tally so important to the anti-ELCA factions? Do you revel in glee that churches, and in some cases, families are torn apart because of this? Because gloating? Not very becoming of someone who espouses Christian love.
It’s important to note that all the places mentioned above such as Orange County, CA, (southern California) are heavily “conservative” areas. I don’t find this to be a coincidence. Those living in heavily “conservative” areas are more likely feeling the brunt of this than those in “liberal” areas. Just because those (conservative) areas are in constant hullabaloo does not mean every other congregation is having the same problems or even close to it.
If it wasn’t CWA ’09, then it would have been something else down the road, not because the ELCA is “too big,” but because allowing for differing opinions, as mentioned in the CWA ’09 resolutions, appears to be no longer good enough for these congregations.
@Jeff
You write,
Oh, we reflect on defections plenty. Somehow, I don’t think that is what you really mean. I think you mean we should feel some remorse, some sense of responsibility or regret, some sense that the defections are our fault–after all, we were warned. Or, as CORE repeatedly whines, “we didn’t leave the ELCA, the ELCA left us.” Poppycock.
@Tony Stoutenburg
Well Tony, bias is how I see this thing. I know that you and your friends in Word Alone and LCMC had some other reasons to leave the ELCA, but it seems that your group must have worked really hard to arouse the homophobia in the congregations. Granted, there is one member in my (former?) congregation who had a son who was molested by a teacher. She has a lot of relatives and friends . Homophobia was preached from this congregation’s pulpit and in the local newspapers. It was partly disguised as “Authority of scripture”. In my experience, very controversial issues die down after while and people are less scared of them- That is unless the authorities get ahold of it and make an inquisition out of it.
Kelly, I addressed that earlier in the thread. Not very charitable of you. This all started when I simply noted that Montana and rural areas are not the only places people are leaving. That’s all. I am not happy to see the church I have served 22 years weakened. Not at all. And to suggest I am borders on false witness. You don’t know me, so don’t make assertions.
Obie,
Not at all. Maybe some sadness the body of Christ is shattered? Of course, for many , it is simply “don’t let the door hit you in the *** on the way out”. And that is really too bad.
I see a lot of “all or nothing” thinking going on in this thing. I guess that has to be when something is controversial. On the other hand the whole sexuality statement was so bound up in indefinite language that I couldn’t completely agree with it either. I think it is good that the synods clarify where they stand so we can get on with life. Some years ago when I was a “Jesus Freak” I did learn to ask God to lead me by the Holy Spirit and help me to seek His will. Let’s put this whole issue in His hands and see what He does with it.
@Jeff
In your reply to Kelly, you suggest we should not make assumptions about you since we don’t know you. You also suggest Kelly and I misread your sensibilities–that you are saddened by ELCA fractures. If I am to accept your suggestion that we do not know how you feel, then I will criticize your writing abilities–if you are sad, why do you sound so glad? If you are truly concerned about the unity of the body of Christ, why do you sound like a cheerleader for division? If we misunderstand you, that is because your writing gives a false impression–or does it?
When you make overstated and overheated comments about the demise of the ELCA, and we call you on it, don’t accuse us of bearing false witness.
The snide part of me would like to add “What Obie said.” But wait a second, Jeff. You’re putting a lot of words in my mouth that I did not say as I really don’t like clergy pulling the admonishment card out to chastize.
I wasn’t just addressing you. I’m going to step back and toss a wide net and point out that if one wants to promote that the LCMC, CORE, WA, etc it would behoove these groups to highlight what is good about the organizations, what makes them shine instead of a PR campaign rooted in The ELCA is dirtybadwrongsucksdeadtoadswithastraw Bunch of Apostates (excuse the hyperbole) campaign.
A little positive PR is better than negative campaigning. Let’s face it, there are websites we all know about that are 100% devoted to bashing the ELCA. Don’t these people have other hobbies?
Maybe it harks back to my mom. The older I get, the more salient her advice to the younger me makes sense. If you have to knock down someone/something else to make yourself look good, how solid of ground are you on in the first place?
If other denominations want to be take seriously, they really need stop devoting entire PR drives to pointing out that XYZ Lutheran Church left the ELCA last week and ABC Lutheran Church is voting next week! because that gives me sod all reasons for why I would be interested in joining that denomination if I was an outsider unaware of the cyberwank.
So maybe I am glib about likening the glee of the ELCA fracturing to puppy stomping. But to someone who has had their congregation stomped on, it really doesn’t make for a meaningful dialog. Because he who has the most cake doesn’t necessarily win. Faith is NOT a competition. It’s a personal journey.
I keep writing on this blog because I am still trying to figure out what I am going to do about church. Do I stay in the LCMC church where the pastor seems to be very strict ? I could of course and just give lip service to it. Do I join my husband at the little UCC church where only 20 show up on Sunday morning and the Sunday School only has 2-8 kids ? I think I am going to keep looking for a church that is alive and has a little flexibility in interpretation of scripture. The awesome God who made the universe that we can now partially see with powerful telescopes, and who made the earth, gave us brains so we could figure out how to live with volcanos and tornados and earthquakes. He also gave us hearts so we could figure out how to get along with one another without destroying each other.
And if we are going to assess the money, we also need to realize that there are some committed to the ELCA that are withold offerings to individual congregations during discernment periods because they don’t want their money going to other causes like LCMC. It isn’t just the people against the CWA that are witholding money.
@Lilly
I’m not sure where you are in NE Wisconsin, but would you be feasible to roadtrip to either Green Bay or the Fox Cities for worship? I know a great ELCA congregation in Green Bay that I highly recommend.
@Kelly
I did, but he was married to my mother … 🙂
Kelly and Obie,
If that is what you interpret as you read, I suggest you read it again. I could go back and give you all the information that has been shared with our congregation over the past few months. Words like “we take no joy in this” ; “reluctant”, and “there is no happiness in the decisions we make” have been the way we have treated it.
Why is that everyone who disagrees with CWA is seen as some sort of neanderthal who has to smack down the ELCA? If you go to our church website, you will see that we have specifically said that we will “treat the ELCA and those who lead it charitably”, and heed the admonition of St. Paul to be “charitable in all things”.
I think that you don’t like it when people paint liberals/progressives with a broad brush and make assumptions ,so what is good for the goose…
As for Word Alone or CORE, our congregation is going non-affiliated, so I have no clue what you are talking about. I have never called anyone an apostate.
Once again, you assume I am a part of something I have never been a member of……oh well, we all know about assumptions…
@Tony Stoutenburg
I had to think about that one for a bit.
Apparently I’m undercaffeinated this morning. Must have more coffee 😉
@Jeff: Okay, not apostate, but I have been called “Unchurched.”
Ouch.
I’m going to say this again: I’m talking about negative campaigning and how it isn’t productive. I never said, “Jeff, stop running Exposing the ELCA” (That would, for record NOT be Jeff’s website, but Dan Skogen’s.)
You may not be on board with the ELCA bashing, but there are plenty, including sanctioned websites of the above organizations. There’s a big difference between not agreeing with the CWA’s decisions and an all-out bashing campaign. I applaud you for not slipping into bashing.
Thanks Kelly, Green Bay is 40 or so miles from here and Appleton area is 30-35. I think I can find something closer. There are some very dynamic churches in both areas.
I think we all operate out of our own experiences. If you have encountered judgmental and negative people who look only for the worst, and not the best in people, then I can understand where you are coming from. Just realize not all of us disagreeing with the ELCA are that way! 🙂
@Kelly
PK humor can take some getting used to.
The comment on the Huffington Post article about most all of the congregations in the MT Synod taking votes on leaving the ELCA is not correct. I am an ELCA pastor in the MT Synod. Though it seems a higher percentage of congregations in our synod are holding votes it is not “all” or even “most.” I would be surprised if it is even 30%.
@Jeff
Yes, we all operate out of our own experiences. Right now my experiences of the heartache our daughter and grandchildren went through with their dad and husband becoming a woman is influencing my attitude towards this discussion in the church. In fact it brought it back in my memory to the point that I didn’t/don’t want to go to church right now. Our daughter is remarried and has joined an evangelical church. The two grand kids are doing pretty well. I just had a good discussion with my 17 yr old grandson who said that “Dad, is so much happier now.” He does say that he has blotted out the part of his life where the “girlfriends” were staying at the house visiting Dad. Now is it up to the theologians to decide this issue? It is far too complicated for that.
@Jeff – I am late to this discussion, but I am involved in the synod in Southern CA you mentioned in which up to 11 congregations may be leaving (they are in various stages of voting). As House of Brat pointed out, these congregations are largely in Orange County, which is a conservative bastion to the nth degree. However, it should also be noted that most of these congregations have had issues with the ELCA for years, and many have not sent benevolence dollars to the synod or churchwide for years either. In essence, they’ve not really been ELCA churches for quite some time; they’re really just getting the paperwork done now. I would, of course, prefer that they stay, but they left in spirit years ago. Whether they stayed because transfer of their pension plan had not yet been worked out is anyone’s guess.
From a personal standpoint – I serve my parish 2 Sundays a month, and live about 45 miles away. The Sundays I am not “on”, my family and I attend church locally. For a time, we attended an Episcopal church. It left the diocese over the sexuality issues and then became embroiled in litigation over the property. Unfortunately, they completely lost their whole sense of mission and vision – they were focused on the lawsuits and the “evil diocese”. My husband was diagnosed with cancer during this time, and not ONCE did anyone from that church ever call or visit us. They were too busy with the litigation. So my perspective is a little different; if a church feels it can’t carry out mission while affiliated with the ELCA, then I think they should figure out where they should be (affiliated or not), go there and carry out that mission. And frankly, for either “side” to engage in bashing the other side in public is an incredible waste of time that could be used to carry out that mission. Just my $0.02.
@Mary
But what about congregations that are truly split right down the middle. We had our second vote two weeks ago? 57% voted to leave the ELCA 43% voted to remain. The vote did not meet constitutional muster, so the resolution did not pass.
It was nearly a 50-50 split. What happens now? Doe those committed to the ELCA concede because there is still conflict? Or does the other half?
And in the middle there are probably a up to 1/3 that will stay with the actual congregation regardless of its affiliation.
I would agree that a congregation, where the VAST majority–is ELCA in name alone should move along. But what about the greyer congregations. We don’t give benevolence because the anti-ELCA council voted it so. So offering is down at my congregation from both sides: those protesting the ELCA and those who are diverting their offerings to the local ELCA synod and churchwide.
For those congregations like mine, there is no easy answer.
@Kelly
A church near me voted to stay in the ELCA but at the same time took a second vote to state that the church would not hire a gay pastor or perform blessings of same sex couples. I had hoped that would be what we did here but it didn’t happen. I wonder if this might be a compromise that would bring your church members a little closer together. This is still a biased opinion but in these smaller towns might help with the conflict.
@ Kelly – the split-down-the-middle hasn’t been the case with the congregations voting to leave in my synod; their votes have been more like 97% in favor. Your situation is, I agree, where it gets really tough. If either “side” concedes to the other, there will still be hard feelings, and the conflict will just get pushed in the corner (from which it will of course re-emerge, and likely more virulent than before). I would guess it depends on why people voted the way they did – if they voted no, was it mainly because they are solidy in favor of the CWA09 decisions? Are they not crazy about the decisions, but feel it’s no reason to leave? Are those who voted for leaving convinced that the ELCA is the Whore of Babylon, or are they just uncomfortable with the decisions? Or (worst case scenario) are they being pressured by the council?
As far as your council, unless someone (probably many someones) from the non-anti-ELCA crowd is interested in running for council, you have an uphill battle (I hate to use that terminology). They are supposed to present the budget for the congregation’s vote at the annual meeting; if the membership thinks benevolence should be back in the budget, there’s a way in Roberts’ Rules to so move from the floor.
I think the church Lilly mentioned did the right thing, and I think that’s what is meant by the term “bound conscience.” Of course, if a congregation is convinced that they will be found guilty by association with the ELCA, then they would never consider an option like the one she described.
My parish is relatively liberal, but we lost a few members after CWA09. Our surprise was the swiftness with which they left – once they realized they wouldn’t be able to make the parish adopt their position, they were gone. These were people I’ve known for many years – or at least I thought I knew them.
Your situation really is difficult. Usually I would recommend pastoral intervention from the Synod, since they have staff trained to deal with congregational conflict, but when the Synod appears to some to represent the reason for the conflict in the first place it’s going to be awfully hard to make any progress. Even bringing in a neutral, secular mediator could be difficult because they aren’t familiar with the back stories, church procedures, etc.
You’re absolutely right, unless a 50/50 congregation agrees on something like the one Lilly mentioned, there is no easy answer for them. Unfortunately, my experience has never touched on such a congregation. That could be SoCal though!
@ Kelly #9
Greetings in the name of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ!
I would like to apologize to you if you have been hurt by my website. I did not intend that the page should be interpreted as an “anti-ELCA site”. Admittedly, I am personally not associated with the ELCA but neither am I associated with CORE, LCMC, NALC, or any other group directly involved in the current situation. In fact, I am a Lutheran from Canada, and I grieve during this time with all my brothers and sisters south of the border.
I do not “squee with delight each time a congregation secedes from the ELCA, nor do I revel in “other people’s pain.” And I certainly do not “revel in stomping puppies”. [The issue of congregations leaving the ELCA is heartbreaking enough on its own; I pray we need not increase that pain by resorting to name calling and ad-hominems.]
Back in December, Obie commented on my site, noting that the list I had recorded reflected the “deep pain and hard feelings” which were visible in the ELCA. I agreed in my response, and indicated then what I had intended the list on my site to be about. “The purpose of this record,” I write there, “is not to say that one side is “winning” or any such thing. It’s simply meant to be a record of the pain brought about as the result of the August vote.” The fact is, members of the body of Christ have been hurt on both sides of this issue. Indeed, the list I maintain is a record not only of congregations that have made difficult decisions to leave, but also those who have in their votes made difficult decisions to stay.
Now, I am not suggesting I do not have my own theological opinions in this matter. I do, just as you do, just as everyone who has commented on this post does. I admit openly that I believe Scripture does not support the measures taken at the August CWA. That said, I abhor and condemn the use of hateful and disgusting language which has too frequently been thrust by some upon those with whom I disagree. Disagreement may justify (in some congregation’s minds) separation from the denomination; but it never justifies hatred and vitriol. Too often, I fear, people on both sides of the divide have fallen into that sin. Indeed, on my website I have found it necessary to censor hateful comments from both sides of the issue.
The list I maintain serves a need expressed by certain members of the ELCA who, by virtue of their bound conscience, feel compelled to at least consider separating from the denomination. Specifically, it serves a need for these members to know they are not alone in their concerns – something many have mentioned they are appreciative of in the comments of my page. If some have used my site for more hurtful purposes, I apologize for that, and grieve with you. To be honest, I would personally prefer the ELCA itself to maintain such a list. But no such record seems forthcoming, and so for the sake of those who truly seem to have found peace, comfort or thought-provoking material in the list I provide, I find it important to continue. [In fact, the time and effort needed to maintain the list is tiresome. I had only intended to keep up the list for a few months, but because it has been identified by its many readers as personally important to them, I continue the work. The list is hardly the focus of my website, and is often a distraction from the majority of what I write on my site.]
I hope I have been able to clarify some of the reasons behind the list I maintain on my site. It is not meant to be an attack on any persons, and I strongly condemn any such use of it.
I pray that as events continue to unfold, God would be at work in the midst of the pain, bringing the grace of Christ to a broken people. Whatever theological differences which might exist between you and I, I trust that such a prayer reflects both of our hearts.
In Christ,
Captain Thin
@Captain Thin … well and gracefully put.